Here I am attaching the most recent communication from Dr. Webre of ICIS. This latest response was in response to my request to keep Victor Martinez out of our contract negotiations regarding our release of the journalistic interview conducted with him. Unlike most news organizations, we offered in fairness and openness to allow Dr. Webre to review the interview first before we release it.

Just before the interview, Victor emailed Dr. Webre pleading with him NOT to do the interview. Dr. Webre gave the interview anyway. Shortly after the interview, Victor continued meddling with the interview process and convinced Dr. Webre that our intentions were sinister and further convinced Dr. Webre that our offer to provide Dr. Webre's interview a huge audience through ATS was actually a "bad" thing - because of ATS's recent history with Laura Knight Jadczyk.

Apparently a 9/11 conspiracy article that was posted on ATS, was reposted on Laura's site. ATS issued her site a warning regarding copyright infringement, and Laura thereby concluded that ATS is COINTELPRO.

Given that Dr. Webre, based on his response, is convinced that the article by Laura is "well researched" - I've decided to look further into this issue with an open mind. Since we have Springer & S.O. with us here, we can get the story straight from the "horse's mouth". Let's examine this article with an open mind, and examine how well-researched and accurate it is, shall we?

First - the emails to/from Dr. Webre, and Laura's article attached:

Dear Mr. Dube - Hi! Thank you for your email.

Please be advised that the information in our email to you was based on our ICIS due diligence in this matter. No third party was involved in this ICIS due diligence regarding the actions of Above Top Secret, their MOFO attorney, and public interest research into the events of September 11, 2001 (9/11). ICIS does not share your opinion of this article on ATS. As we have indicated in our correspondence with Mr. Broadbent, we are ccing Mr. Martinez in a spirit of transparency.

ICIS would prefer to correspond in this matter directly with Mr. Broadbent from henceforth.

I appreciate your response, however I am somewhat confused by your choice to cc Victor Martinez concerning this issue which does not concern him. But given that fact, I believe it's safe to assume that much of the information you forwarded came from Victor himself. And I'm not sure if you are aware of his history of spreading mis-statements and untruths. I find it somewhat curious, however, that you have accepted his "interfering" into the ongoing process regarding your video-taped interview. It is further disturbing given the fact that Mr. Martinez is one of those behind the push to publicize the Serpo story.

Steve Broadbent and I work closely together and I have seen the details of your instructions for my colleague Mr. Broadbent. However with the obvious interference of Mr. Martinez - even going so far as to stream the full and private email exchange between yourself and Mr. Broadbent to his email list, it was necessary to set matters straight. We are quite capable of streaming this video to a very large audience, and offering you a significant opportunity to share your meaningful answers to the questions put forth in the interview. From what I've seen it was a great exchange.

However the actions of Mr. Martinez, and his forwarding to you of a poorly researched and horribly inaccurate article about ATS, confirms to us the fact that Mr. Martinez is terribly afraid of your interview and your statements being made public, for some reason.

We have agreed to your instructions to send you the interview for your review. I am aware that you can only review after June 13th, which is fine. If, due to Mr. Martinez' interference, you are uncomfortable with ATS as a platform, we have many other options at our disposal to stream this educational interview to the public.

We are being very fair and honest with you, Dr. Webre, in all of our dealings and we appreciate your time in providing this interview and the integrity and straightforwardness of your answers. We will make all effort to distribute this interview according to how you feel it would best serve the public interest. Our goal is the same as yours, to share the truth with the public. All we ask in return, Dr. Webre, is that you exclude Mr. Martinez from any further correspondence between our organization and yours. His involvement in this exchange creates an atmosphere of distrust and unprofessionalism. His attacks are unwarranted and unnecessary.

We appreciate your consideration in this matter. And both Mr. Broadbent and I look forward to working with you in the near future.

[Hide Quoted Text]> Dear Mr. Dube - Hi! Regarding your intervention today (See your > letter below), we would very much appreciate your not interfering in > the on-going process regarding my video-taped interview. I am > traveling now, and we had left instructions with Mr. Broadbent that > the video-taped interview be sent to our offices by post for review > and approval before any further action may be taken. We cannot begin > to review the digital file prior to June 13, 2006. Moreover the > entire matter has to be approved by our Board. > > I am enclosing below a very disturbing article regarding ATS (Above > Top Secret), ATS's Attorney - Jaeschke, Jr., Wayne of Morrison & > Foerster LLP of McLean, VA 22102 [sic] ( aka "MOFO"). The article > documents ATS's and this attorney's actions towards public interest > investigation behind the events of September 11, 2001 ("9/11"). Mr. > Jaeschke appears to play a role very much in conflict with > constitutional core values that ICIS supports. > > Moreover, ATS and Mr. Jaesche's role appears to be in conflict with > the spirit of draft U.S. Congressional legislation in which I have > played an Advisory role - the SEPTEMBER 11 TREASON INDEPENDENT > PROSECUTOR ACT: > > http://peaceinspace.blogs.com/911/ > > Your public presumption that ICIS and/or myself would consider Above > Top Secret (ATS) to be a proper venue for my recorded interview is > incorrect and without foundation. > > With all best wishes, Alfred Webre > > > _________________________________________ > Alfred Lambremont Webre, JD, MEd > INSTITUTE FOR COOPERATION IN SPACE (ICIS) > 3339 WEST 41 AVENUE > VANCOUVER, BC. V6N 3E5 CANADA > TEL: 604-733-8134 > FAX: 604-733-8135 > EMAIL: alw@peaceinspace.com > ICIS: http://www.peaceinspace.com > EXOPOLITICS: http://www.exopolitics.com > CAMPAIGN: http://www.peaceinspace.org > STAR DREAMS: http://www.peaceinspace.net > > ====================== > Subject: A VERY DISTURBING MOFO, ATS & 9/11 Article > http://realcostofwar.blogspot.com/ > Thursday, March 23, 2006 Attack proves ATS is Cointelpro!!! > Sincethere really is no copyright law which prohibits the type of > commentaryand analysis of any article which was done by Joe Quinn of > an articleat Above Top Secret, it appears that the 'gloves have come > off' and the'Above Top Secret boys' are now playing 'hardball' in the > attempt toquash the Truth about the issues involved. These issues are > what isTrue about the events of 911! It is now very obvious they want > the Liesto remain dominant in the public's eves. > > ATS has engaged theservices of one of the country's largest law firms > (maybe even one ofthe entire world's largest) in their attempt to > prohibit the Truth frombeing disseminated to any who are interested > in hearing it. This is NOTabout 'copyright', but about attacking the > Truth. > > Below is an article by Laura Knight Jadczyk which explains all this > in much more detail: > > Abovetopsecret.com EXPOSED!!! > > > Someof you may have noticed that signs of the times was down for > awhiletoday. This was due to the actions of the website > abovetopsecret.com.As I have speculated, they were given the task to > run cointelpro on JoeQuinn's article: > Evidence That a Frozen Fish Didn't Impact the Pentagon on 9/11 - and > Neither Did a Boeing 757 > > which was an analysis of the "catherder" article on > abovetopsecretwhich essentially was support for the Bush Neocons > conspiracy theoryabout the events of September 11. > > As anyone who is familiar with copyright law knows, this is perfectly > legal under standard copyright law. > > However, abovetopsecret.com, like Bush and the Neocons, make up > theirown laws. As I have chronicled on this blog, their urgent > demands thatwe remove this article because it was a violation of > their "creativecommons" copyright was absurd and simply evidence of > their position asan active cointelpro/psy-ops propagator on the > internet. It isn'tcopyrights they are concerned about, it is google > bombing and runningpsy-ops. And now, they have proven it. > > Here is the letter wereceived from our server people after being > notified by about a hundredpeople via email that the signs of the > times site was down: > > > > > From: "James" **** > > > > To: Arkadiusz Jadczyk > > Subject: FW: Notice of Copyright Infringement > > Date sent: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 14:55:32 -0500 > > Date forwarded: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 14:38:12 -0600 > > > Hi, we received the following complaint from your site. Please > investigate this and let us know. > James > > <SNIP> (****deleted the copyright infringement notice from ATS's lawfirm due to the confidential disclaimer at the bottom of the forwarded email. (shown below) -Ry*****) > > This message contains information which may be confidential > andprivileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive > forthe addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the > messageor any information contained in the message. If you have > received themessage in error, please advise the sender by reply > e-mail @mofo.com,and delete the message. > > > Nowfolks, come on, how many websites that were just started by an > ordinaryguy who took on a couple of "ordinary" partners, and is just > a hobbyand sharing on the internet, are able to afford a copyright > attorney inMcLean Virginia??? > > This action also is highly suggestive ofthe idea that the Pentagon > Issue is a LOT more sensitive than anyonehas thus far suspected! Do > take note of THAT! > > I hope thateveryone who reads this will spread this information far > and widebecause these people are EVIL Bush supporters, Cyber Nazi > Brown Shirts. > > > See the blog posts: > > Is Is the Above Top Secret Forum COINTELPRO? > > COINTELPRO Updates: Above Top Secret Forum -- this post is most > pertinent to the current Simon Grey issue. > > Abovetopsecret.com COINTELPRO Update > > AboveTopSecret.com COINTELPRO Update 2 > > More Inside Scoops on Abovetopsecret.com! > > The Spider and The Fly: SkepticOverlord and COINTELPRO > > Abovetopsecret: Ethics and Google Bombs > > See also forum threads on abovetopsecret.com and project SERPO: > > http://signs-of-the-times.org/signs/for ? 3015#p3015 > > http://signs-of-the-times.org/signs/for ? php?id=523 > > > Our research team is out there digging up info. This is back already: > > > > Did a search on their lawyer, Wayne Jaeschke. Here is the official > bio from his law firm's site (www.mofo.com!): > > > Mr. Jaeschke is a patent attorney in Morrison & Foerster LLP's > Intellectual Property group. Wayne has been admitted to practice > before the USPTO since 1994 and has substantial experience preparing > and prosecuting patent applications in many fields, including: > computer software, surface and polymer, electromechanical and optical > devices, and pharmaceuticals. Wayne has also successfully handled > internet domain name litigation and dispute resolution; copyright > infringement litigation, inter partes reexamination, novelty, > infringement and validity opinions for all technical disciplines; > patent licensing, collaborative research agreements with major U.S. > universities, and related intellectual property matters. > > > Prior to joining Morrison & Foerster, Mr. Jaeschke worked for Allied- > Signal's water treatment polymer group where he assisted clients in > the areas of papermaking, mining, oil refining, and municipal water > treatment. After Allied Signal, Mr. Jaeschke worked for Betz' > Laboratories paper chemicals group where he was a process specialist > in the field of wet-end paper chemistry, recycled fiber usage and > overall papermaking performance enhancement through the use of > specialty chemical technology. > > > Mr. Jaeschke holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Chemical > Engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, received the > degree of Juris Doctor, cum laude, from the American University's > Washington College of Law and is registered to practice before the > United States Patent and Trademark Office. > > His law firm, Morrison & Foerster (hence the mofo) has this about the > firm. Sounds like a high-powered and expensive one: > > Morrison & Foerster maintains one of the largest intellectual > property practices in the world, with more than 300 lawyers providing > a full range of services, including counseling, prosecution, > litigation, ­­­dispute resolution and licensing transactions in patent, > trademark, and copyright matters. > > > > The firm's practice has been consistently ranked by independent > observers as one of the top intellectual property practices in the > country. In 2003, the firm was short-listed for the USA Intellectual > Property Law Firm of the Year Award by Chambers & Partners in London. > In Managing IP's latest rankings of the top law firms in this field, > Morrison & Foerster was one of only a small number of full-service > firms (as opposed to IP boutiques) included in the Top 25 based on > volume of U.S. contentious and non-contentious matters. > > > Morrison & Foerster's IP practice serves clients in a wide range of > industries, including biotechnology, medical devices and healthcare; > electronics, software, telecommunications, Internet and > semiconductors; chemistry, chemical engineering and materials > science; and media and entertainment. The firm's attorneys, including > partners Tom Ciotti, Kate Murashige and Gladys Monroy, have played a > significant role in the creation and protection of many of the > landmark patent portfolios in the information technology and life > science industries. > > > And this, regarding the complaint: > > > "... derivative works"; and 3) must provide proper attribution to the > author and a link to the original article." > > > Frozenfish is not technically a derivative work. A derivative use of > theoriginal would be if you made a movie using the article as a > script, orif you translated the original article into another > language. Althoughthis is somewhat of a gray area: > > > http://www.chillingeffects.org/derivative/ > > > "In short, a derivative work is a whole work based on one or more > other whole works" > > > Criticism is protected under copyright law: > > > http://www.chillingeffects.org/fanfic/n ... NoticeID=7 > > > "Themost significant factor in this analysis is the fourth, effect on > themarket. If a copier's use supplants demand for the original work, > thenit will be very difficult for him or her to claim fair use. On > theother hand, if the use does not compete with the original, for > examplebecause it is a parody, criticism, or news report, it is more > likely tobe permitted as "fair use."" > > > So, it appears that ATS is claiming that Frozen Fish will supplant > demand for the original article. > > > To decide whether a use is "fair use" or not, courts consider: > > > 1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use > is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit education purposes; > > 2. the nature of the copyrighted work; > > 3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to > the copyrighted work as a whole; and, > > 4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of > the copyrighted work. 17 U.S.C. 107(1-4) > > > Number one in the above list is why ATS has been harping on the links > to book sales. > > > > Joe Quinn, author of the critique of the abovetopsecret.com article > has sent the following: > > > The "derivative work" claim is BS, pure and simple. I did not "alter, > transform, or build upon" the ATS piece, so it is not a derivative > work. Commercial use would be if they were some charge for people to > access the work - there is none. The use of the ATS piece was criticism, > therefore it was not competing with the original work. > > > Notice that in the lawyer's email, he does not make reference to any law, > Why? Because there is no legal infringement. Of course, all of this is > academic since the server folks are not in the business of defending > their clients, they will bow down to the mighty dollar, or the threat of > having to spend some, every time. So psychopathic manipulative tactics win > the day, as usual. I think a lawyer joke is in order. > > > > The devil visited a lawyer's office and made him an offer. "I can > arrange some things for you, " the devil said. "I'll increase your > income five-fold. Your partners will love you; your clients will > respect you; you'll have four months of vacation each year and live > to be a hundred. All I require in return is that your wife's soul, > your children's souls, and their children's souls rot in hell for > eternity." > > The lawyer thought for a moment. "What's the catch?" he asked. > > > The best we can do is use this episode to further expose the > abovetopsecret.com crowd > for what they are: the Internet equivalent of the national Enquirer: > disinfo, psy-ops and just plain trash. > > > > > ====================== > > -----Original Message----- > From: ryguy@realityuncovered.com [mailto:ryguy@realityuncovered.com] > Sent: Sunday, June 4, 2006 12:40 PM > To: victorgm@webtv.net, alw@peaceinspace.com, rosin@peaceinspace.com > Cc: <SNIP.......> > Subject: RE: Mr Webre: Don't sign a video release to the Reality > Uncovered Web site > > > Victor Martinez writes: > > "Having 25 carnival-like > forum freaks who sit around clad all day in their bathrobes with NO day > jobs waiting for their next welfare check to arrive is NOT going to > advance your cause one iota!" > > A response from RealityUncovered.com co-owner Ryan Dube: > > ----------- > > I offer this response to Victor's unsolicited attack against > RealityUncovered.com and our interview with the esteemed Dr. Webre of ICIS. I > would like to announce that contrary to Mr. Martinez' diatribe above, we have > come to an agreement with www.AboveTopSecret.com regarding the non-commercial > distribution of this meaningful interview with Dr. Webre. Once Mr. Webre and > his colleagues have had a chance to review the full, unedited interview which > we will be providing in digital format - we will be displaying it > publicly, to > a very wide audience, for educational purposes. > > Due to our own current bandwidth limitations, AboveTopSecret has agreed to > assist us with the hosting and presentation of the interview on > www.AboveTopSecret.com. With over 1,600,000 unique IP addresses visiting a > month, over 62,000 registered members, and over 60 MILLION hits a month - > AboveTopSecret.com is by far the number ONE destination for alternative topic > discussion on the internet. The benefit for Dr. Webre by dealing with people > of high ethics and civil manners has paid off in spades. > > Your attacks, Mr. Martinez, are meaningless and juvenile. And I'm sure Dr. > Webre recognizes them as such. We have established a meaningful and > professional relationship with Dr. Webre and ICIS, which we look forward to > fostering with a fair and balanced discussion of the relevant issues. > > Best Regards, > > Ryan Dube > Co-Owner and Administrator > www.RealityUncovered.com > >

Share On:

I posted the above so that the entire article could be viewed. It can also be viewed in its entirety (including the letter from ATS's law firm) HERE

Now I will take out the excerpts that apply the allegations that ATS is cointelpro. As we've stated early on in this forum, no one is above the truth, and that includes ATS. In the earliest days of Serpo, we (Zep Tepi & myself), in the process of tracking down a hoaxed email that looked to be from ATS attacking Bill Ryan for Serpo - were convinced at one point that ATS was behind the hoax. At the end of our investigation, the evidence showed that a long-time member, who had been disgruntled for quite some time against the owners of ATS, had purpetrated this hoax partially as a "joke" and partially to "get" ATS for past grudges.

We will examine the allegations below in the same light. To start out, we will accept both possibilities - ATS is Cointelpro, AND the possibility that ATS is simply one of the largest online discussion forums in the world. Therefore we'll examine these allegations below, and see which possibility the evidence proves.

From John Adams' Alien and Sedition Acts to the Cold War and Joseph McCarthy, civil liberties and national security have had a delicate and troubled relationship in American history. Notorious among these is the case of the domestic surveillance program run by the FBI between 1956 and 1971 (after the censure of Joseph McCarthy by the Senate) under the name COINTELPRO (counterintelligence program). COINTELPRO was a secret FBI program designed to monitor and "neutralize" domestic groups deemed by the FBI to be a danger to national security. Such groups included anti-war groups and civil rights groups and individuals like Martin Luther King, Jr. and even Eleanor Roosevelt.

COINTELPRO and the Church Commission:

The domestic surveillance programs of COINTELPRO were only brought to light in early 1970s after a Senate Committee was created to investigate the FBI and the involvement of other intelligence agencies in political repression. The Committee was named for its Chairman, Idaho Senator Frank Church. It's findings were voluminous and, to many, worrying.. <snip...>Under the aegis of COINTELPRO, the FBI kept files on a great number of Americans and investigated the NAACP for 25 years. The FBI admitted that it had burglarized political groups to gain information on their activities.

In other words, pre-70's COINTELPRO was the FBI "infiltrating" groups which they deemed a threat to national security. If a group was meeting for any reason, and could be suspected of being a "covert" communist meeting, the FBI would do whatever it wanted to obtain information on their activities - including burglarize those groups.

In the 70's, after the investigations and the Church Commission, new guidelines were put in place.

As a result of the Church Commission's findings then Attorney General Edward Levi drew up a series of guidelines to govern domestic investigations. Key among these rules was that investigations could only be brought where "specific and articulable facts" indicated criminal activity.

It wasn't until Sept 11th, when John Ashcroft substantially altered these guidelines - which is, of course, a major source of current national debate in the United States. Note the quote below, that identifies some of the reasons FBI agents can use as part of "COINTELPRO" in order to open a file on any particular person.

The problem that the Levi guidelines were intended to solve — and that the new guidelines will exacerbate — relates to the purpose for which the public information is gathered and utilized, not so much with the privacy of the information itself... Magnifying the problem is the fact that the intelligence gathering activities may now be directed at political meetings — particularly unpopular political meetings. Imagine FBI agents taking notes on a pastor's sermon, a rabbi's lecture, a priest's homily — and noting the names and license plate numbers of attendees. Your "Greenpeace" bumper sticker, publicly displayed, becomes sufficient cause for the FBI to open a file on you. --Mark D. Rasch, J.D., is a former head of the Justice Department's computer crime unit.

It's important to note - that stringent guidelines were put in place POST-1970's. In 1998, ATS was started by site owner Simon Gray, and it began as a collection of conspiracy-related pages. At that time, the guidelines concerning COINTELPRO were quite stringent.

HOWEVER....

With that said, the OTHER side of the coin is this. In 1995, Mr. Charles Swett, the Assistant for Strategic Assessment at the Pentagon, wrote the following assessment for the DoD entitled "Strategic Assessment: The Internet"

This is the abstract at the beginning of the assessment, and outlines how the DoD could possibly use the internet to "monitor public message traffic". The entire document can be Viewed Here. The abstract is shown here:

The political process is moving onto the Internet. Both within the United States and internationally, individuals, interest groups, and even nations are using the Internet to find each other, discuss the issues, and further their political goals. The Internet has also played an important role in recent conflicts. As a result, overseas segments of the Internet can be a useful tool for DoD, both for gathering and for disseminating information. By monitoring public message traffic and alternative news sources from around the world, early warning of impending significant developments could be developed, in advance of more traditional means of indications and warning. Commentary placed on the Internet by observers on the scene of low-intensity conflicts overseas could be useful to U.S. policymaking. During larger scale conflicts, when other conventional channels are disrupted, the Internet can be the only available means of communication into and out of the affected areas. Internet messages originating within regions under authoritarian control could provide other useful intelligence. Public messages conveying information about the intent of overseas groups prone to disrupting U.S. military operations can provide important counterintelligence. The Internet could also be used offensively as an additional medium in psychological operations campaigns and to help achieve unconventional warfare objectives. Used creatively as an integral asset, the Internet can facilitate many DoD operations and activities.

The following paragraph speaks to how such an intelligence gathering network would need to be "constructed":

Beside being used to develop early warning of developing conflicts or the beginnings of new global trends or "sea changes," the Internet can be used at the opposite end of the spectrum: to obtain pinpoint information about specific matters of interest. Networks of human sources with access to the Internet could be developed in areas of security concern to the U.S., and these sources could be oriented to seek specific needed information. If constructed and managed correctly, such a system could be much more responsive and efficient than the current complex, unwieldy intelligence tasking and collection processes we must use. We might even consider cultivating the capability to perform strategic reconnaissance "by modem." This approach could never replace official DoD intelligence collection systems or services, but could be a useful adjunct.

This report was provided to the DoD in 1995. ATS was created in 1998.

COULD Abovetopsecret be a government project such as is described in this paper? Sure - why not? Is it? That's what we need to find out now, isn't it?

Should be simple enough, right? Of course...all of the above was just an analysis of the title...we haven't even gotten to the article yet.

The purpose of cointelpro was not infiltration but rather the fostering of intimidation and paranoia.

"Found among the Media documents was a new word, "COINTELPRO," short for the FBI's "secret counterintelligence program," created to investigate and disrupt dissident political groups in the U.S. Under these programs, beginning in 1956, the bureau worked to "enhance the paranoia endemic in these circles," as one COINTELPRO memo put it, "to get the point across there is an FBI agent behind every mailbox." Washington Post, 1971

Just want to set the record straight.

amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978

So, to answer that question - we must go back to the beginning of ATS. Was there a government agency working out the details with SimonGray on how best to initiate this top secret government "intelligence gathering" program? Let's read from his own blog - the quote below is an excerpt from his full blog at Abovetopsecret.com. These are the words from the man himself, as he describes the first fledgling days of ATS:

ATS started out as a pet project of mine. My ambition was to eventually build up a repository of information on all manner of different subjects that interested me, from conspiracy theories to secretive military & government projects. As time went on I decided to add a mailing list, a chatroom and eventually our very first discussion forum system.

Back in the “olden days”, the board was a third-party setup run by ezBoard. It was never my idea for this collaborative aspect to become the mainstay of ATS. However, as the members of the board grew, and their request for information on different topics from me expanded, it became clear that ATS was no longer a one-man band. We needed to grow bigger!

Over a number of years, I became good friends with the people who volunteered to help moderate the forums systems. Those who have been here since the beginning of ATS can tell you what a different place it is now! With their help, and the interaction of those members who became business partners of mine, together we have created a community so interactive, many call it a second home.

Doesn't really sound like a cloak-n-dagger operation does it? In fact, it sounds more like how we've begun our own forum here today. Very simple, very mundane, but a lot of hard work and long hours.

In the next episode, we'll examine the rest of the article and explore each of the charges that are laid out in this article.

It isn't far fetched at all. Recruitment during adolescence is common to the point of cliche, especially when the internet was seen as a young phenomenon and one where a subculture was involved. No different from ufology in that regard.

GLP has been proven to be a front, and the proof is still online- address of USAF intel officer involved, etc.- just google it.

ATS is cleverer in its disguise but its behaviour is what gives it away. Time and again people ask why it is the way it is, and the pattern of who is banned when- real whistleblowers for example are wiped out before even managing to blow the whistle - shows it has FBI style cointelpro at its roots. Look at real examples of cointelpro such as that surrounding MLK and compare.

Are alligators coming out of your tap faucet? Give it time, if the belief becomes strong enough you'll soon have hot and cold running crocodilians.